A Sea Of Red

I'm pretty sure everyone on here will hate me for this, but the BCS isn't doing it's job if Oklahoma St gets into the championship. The job of the BCS is put #1 vs #2. Alabama is without a doubt the clear #2. They've not only beaten but blown out everyone they've played, with the exception of LSU. Oklahoma St. has had a few close wins and a loss to Iowa St. Furthermore, the competition that Oklahoma St. has played isn't even comparable to what Bama has dealt with. The arguments for Oklahoma St. getting into the championship are outright silly; they game would be more exciting or Bama doesn't play offense? First, if Oklahoma St. plays LSU, the game will be over by halftime. Just because the LSU/Bama game was low scoring does not mean that the Tide don't play offense. Bama's offense ranks 16th in the country in Points for and 15th in the country in rushing yards. What no one is talking about is how terrible Oklahoma State's defense is, they rank 61 in Points against. The BCS's job is to put #1 vs #2, not to get an exciting game. If Oklahoma St makes the championship, its a shame, the Tide are the clear #2.

Bama had their shot and lost. Now they get a chance at the national championship at a neutral site. If they win it is meaningless. Yes they are probably the 2 best teams, but because the BCS is a terrible system we will never truly know

Is there anyone in America who really wants to see another LSU-Bama FG-fest outside of the folks in the State of Alabama? We've been there and done that and not felt particularly good about the way it went down.

And I am curious as to why Alabama is such a clear cut #2 over Okie State in some of your eyes.

Truthfully, the only ones I can stopping the LSU Tigers at this point are Baton Rouge PD.

Sly Fox wrote:Truthfully, the only ones I can stopping the LSU Tigers at this point are Baton Rouge PD.

And even that is debatable.

Who cares if it's a field goal fest? Should Oklahoma State get the nod because of the score of the game between LSU and Bama? If Bama had their shot and this game is meaningless, why did Wisconsin just win the B1G championship yesterday against MST when they lost to them earlier in the season? Should the B1G have broken their rules and picked two teams that hadn't played each other? Why does winning your conference matter? If we had a playoff system, winning your conference wouldn't matter. In basketball, UConn finished like 9th or 10th in the Big East last year, yet they undoubtedly won a national title. Who cares if these teams have played before? I'd much prefer to watch a rematch of 35 NFL players, then to watch LSU roll someone else.

cjsweat wrote:Who cares if it's a field goal fest? Should Oklahoma State get the nod because of the score of the game between LSU and Bama? If Bama had their shot and this game is meaningless, why did Wisconsin just win the B1G championship yesterday against MST when they lost to them earlier in the season? Should the B1G have broken their rules and picked two teams that hadn't played each other? Why does winning your conference matter? If we had a playoff system, winning your conference wouldn't matter. In basketball, UConn finished like 9th or 10th in the Big East last year, yet they undoubtedly won a national title. Who cares if these teams have played before? I'd much prefer to watch a rematch of 35 NFL players, then to watch LSU roll someone else.

The difference between the Wisconsin-Michigan State is that Wisconsin earned their rematch...on the field. With the fact that that they are in different divisions, the possibility of a rematch was always there, but they would have to earn it. If they lost to Penn State last week, then there would have been no rematch. LSU and Alabama are in the same division and their rematch wouldnt have been brought about on the field, it would have come through computers and human polls.

BJWilliams wrote:

cjsweat wrote:Who cares if it's a field goal fest? Should Oklahoma State get the nod because of the score of the game between LSU and Bama? If Bama had their shot and this game is meaningless, why did Wisconsin just win the B1G championship yesterday against MST when they lost to them earlier in the season? Should the B1G have broken their rules and picked two teams that hadn't played each other? Why does winning your conference matter? If we had a playoff system, winning your conference wouldn't matter. In basketball, UConn finished like 9th or 10th in the Big East last year, yet they undoubtedly won a national title. Who cares if these teams have played before? I'd much prefer to watch a rematch of 35 NFL players, then to watch LSU roll someone else.

The difference between the Wisconsin-Michigan State is that Wisconsin earned their rematch...on the field. With the fact that that they are in different divisions, the possibility of a rematch was always there, but they would have to earn it. If they lost to Penn State last week, then there would have been no rematch. LSU and Alabama are in the same division and their rematch wouldnt have been brought about on the field, it would have come through computers and human polls.

Oklahoma St.'s loss was to Iowa St.... Bama's loss was to LSU. What other argument do you need? Bama's schedule was tougher and their loss wasn't nearly as bad as the Cowbows. Bama is a clear #2. If Oklahoma St. had received the bid it would have also come from computers and human polls, so what would it matter? No one would be arguing for the teams to finish it on the field then.

well the precious BCS system got exactly what it wanted, an all SEC title game

This will mark year 10 of my BCS protest. I will not watch any of the BCS games...

The entire "regular season is a playoff," argument for the BCS has been rendered meaningless with a Bama-LSU rematch. Its like Duke losing to Kentucky in the Final Four, but being given the nod to advance. Forget that Alabama didn't win their conference, let alone their division, and LOST to LSU AT HOME!!!. Yes Okie State's loss to Iowa State was a "Worse loss," but it was also on the road.

I'd also like to state neither Virginia Tech nor Michigan deserve at-large bids. However, at least VT did win their division, which is more than can be said for Michigan. Boise State got hosed.

ATrain wrote:The entire "regular season is a playoff," argument for the BCS has been rendered meaningless with a Bama-LSU rematch. Its like Duke losing to Kentucky in the Final Four, but being given the nod to advance. Forget that Alabama didn't win their conference, let alone their division, and LOST to LSU AT HOME!!!. Yes Okie State's loss to Iowa State was a "Worse loss," but it was also on the road.

I'd also like to state neither Virginia Tech nor Michigan deserve at-large bids. However, at least VT did win their division, which is more than can be said for Michigan. Boise State got hosed.

+1
Couldn't have said it better myself, perfect example as to why I'm against moving from FCS to FBS. It's all money driven and a popularity contest, and lets be honest we'd never win a popularity contest God love us!

cjsweat wrote:

BJWilliams wrote:

cjsweat wrote:Who cares if it's a field goal fest? Should Oklahoma State get the nod because of the score of the game between LSU and Bama? If Bama had their shot and this game is meaningless, why did Wisconsin just win the B1G championship yesterday against MST when they lost to them earlier in the season? Should the B1G have broken their rules and picked two teams that hadn't played each other? Why does winning your conference matter? If we had a playoff system, winning your conference wouldn't matter. In basketball, UConn finished like 9th or 10th in the Big East last year, yet they undoubtedly won a national title. Who cares if these teams have played before? I'd much prefer to watch a rematch of 35 NFL players, then to watch LSU roll someone else.

The difference between the Wisconsin-Michigan State is that Wisconsin earned their rematch...on the field. With the fact that that they are in different divisions, the possibility of a rematch was always there, but they would have to earn it. If they lost to Penn State last week, then there would have been no rematch. LSU and Alabama are in the same division and their rematch wouldnt have been brought about on the field, it would have come through computers and human polls.

Oklahoma St.'s loss was to Iowa St.... Bama's loss was to LSU. What other argument do you need? Bama's schedule was tougher and their loss wasn't nearly as bad as the Cowbows. Bama is a clear #2. If Oklahoma St. had received the bid it would have also come from computers and human polls, so what would it matter? No one would be arguing for the teams to finish it on the field then.

and...you completely missed my point...

No, I got your point. Your point is that you should have to earn it on the field. Oklahoma St. didn't earn a spot in the championship game anymore than Alabama did. My point is that arguing that any team should have to prove it on the field, at this point, is silly. We don't have a playoff or plus 1 system yet, so it's not going to happen. The argument of who should have gotten into the championship game, has to be argued within the boundaries of the current BCS system. It's like getting caught with marijuana and then arguing that it should be legal, it doesn't matter because you still got caught. The point is that arguing that Bama or Oklahoma St should have to prove it on the field, is a useless argument for determining who should be in the championship. I like everyone else would love to see a playoff system but we don't have it yet. Therefore, based on the current BCS system, Alabama is the clear #2 team in the country. Their best win was better than Oklahoma St.'s, and Oklahoma St.'s loss was worse. The BCS is under no obligation to avoid rematches, pick a more offensively minded team or pick a more "entertaining" game. Their job is put the #1 and #2 teams against each other based on W's, L's and strength of schedule. They did their job.

My point was how the rematch came about. Wisconsin vs. Michigan State came about because of what happened on the field. Wisconsin won their way to a rematch with Michigan State, and because they are in different divisions, the possibility was always there. Alabama and LSU are in the same division, and outside of the BCS, there was no way for a rematch to happen.

Roll Tide Roll.

Mike Gundy said last night: "I think people have to decide whether they want to see a 9-6 game or a 39-36 game."

1. BAMA lost to LSU, in OT, by a field goal. The stats were on BAMA's side (except, unfortunately, for the final score.

2. The real question, however, should not be "what game do people want to see, but "who are the best two teams".

3. A better question Gundy could have asked: "I think people have to decide whether they want to see a 9-6 game [Alabama/LSU] or a 39-3 game [LSU/OKST] (Just remember the beat down of Tay-Hoss 2 years ago)

4. The "Big" 12 is all about high scoring offenses. It reminds me of a movie: "Big 12 teams are easy."

if they're so certain these are the best 2 teams, then why don't we just have those same people decide who the best team is and then we'll have our champion. Heck, it couldn't be any easier in this situation.

I think LSU and Alabama are the 2 best teams. Sucks that they played each other already, but NFL Super Bowl could be a rematch also...

I really wish that they would do the same thing as the FCS. Could you imagine a 20 team tournament? That would be unbelievable. NCAA is to shortsighted, because they can grab a whole lot of little money on so many little games, but a tournament would create such a BIG event for them. Would be an exciting event!!

Don't give me the argument of too many games and too much time off at school - if our level can do it - they can too.

I think in order to keep the season meaningful an 8-12 team tourny is the way to go. It would be so huge and make college football even larger then it already is

According to Herbstreit, if the NCAA decides on a playoff format, it will max out at 4 teams.

Jay Bilas hit the nail on the head this morning in a tweet. "Football: Argue over who's No. 3, and shut out the rest. Basketball: Argue who's No. 38, and play it off. Every game counts? Really?"

TDDance234 wrote:Jay Bilas hit the nail on the head this morning in a tweet. "Football: Argue over who's No. 3, and shut out the rest. Basketball: Argue who's No. 38, and play it off. Every game counts? Really?"

+1,000
leave it to a Dukie to really get it

okie st lost to iowa st.
alabama lost to lsu

okie st has beaten more ranked opponents than alabama.

it is pretty even in my mind. at that point you give it to ok st.

i would have no problem giving the bcs title game to okst. here is the problem though. their defense is HHHHHHHORRRRRIBBLEEEEE. lsu would put up 50-60 pts on those dimwits.

my boys in blue got to a bcs bowl because they travel well.

RubberMallet wrote:

my boys in blue got to a bcs bowl because they travel well.

Which is one of the many reasons I hate the bowl system...it's not merit-based, it's money-based. What other sport does that? That's like MLB telling the Rays that they're taking the Red Sox over them in the playoffs because they have a bigger fan-base. It's ridiculous, and one of many reasons why college football frustrates me so much (even though the on-field product is generally good...but the postseason mess keeps me from ever becoming a die-hard follower...the end of the season is just awful).

cjsweat wrote: Their job is put the #1 and #2 teams against each other based on W's, L's and strength of schedule. They did their job.

Actually this is just plain dead wrong. Okie State had more wins over quality opponents and a better schedule, and it's really not even that close.

Bama beat a total of 3 teams with a winning record....3.

WinthropEagleFan wrote:

RubberMallet wrote:

my boys in blue got to a bcs bowl because they travel well.

Which is one of the many reasons I hate the bowl system...it's not merit-based, it's money-based. What other sport does that? That's like MLB telling the Rays that they're taking the Red Sox over them in the playoffs because they have a bigger fan-base. It's ridiculous, and one of many reasons why college football frustrates me so much (even though the on-field product is generally good...but the postseason mess keeps me from ever becoming a die-hard follower...the end of the season is just awful).

totally agreed....but i'll take it. i think it will be a good game.